Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

threads.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 210 posts

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#131

Post by suladead »

doublesocket wrote: post #59
prodigycorp wrote: post #14

What would this have costed had they used render or railway? Maybe, what, $200 a month? Vercel's pricing is so ridiculously convoluted that you can't even cleanly compare usage. With render/railway/(insert provider of choice) you can at least predict that you're your biggest cost is going to be egress. edit: I just saw that it gets 450m pageviews. I'm guessing on the upper end this costs ~$1k with railway + cloudflar…

Railway is getting so good I'm not sure what Vercel brings to the party anyway.

And their CEO doesn't post selfies with war criminals

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#132

Post by AceJohnny2 »

SahAssar wrote: post #83
heipei wrote: post #69

The post said 450 million pageviews, likely since November. If we make very generous assumptions and assume that each pageview is a megabyte (very generous based on my own experience scanning billions of websites), then that's 450TB total in traffic. If you really did 450TB per month in traffic, you would need slightly more than one gigabit line (and hence VPS), but not more than two. With Hetzner the traffic would c…

Well, https://jmail.world/jacebook-logo.png is 670KB by itself and loaded on initial load, so I think they might have blown your suggested traffic budget and still have some optimization to do.

How is that image 670 KB!? Definitely some optimization low-hanging fruit there.

Edit: dang, even pngcrush can't get it below 580 KB. Disappointing performance on PNG's part.

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#133

Post by ramoz »

butlike wrote: post #119
ramoz wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not bare-cloud? Esp with AI... in 10min or less an agent can deploy almost any stack to an optimal AWS setup for a fraction of the cost of any platform.

Try it out. Implementation is always harder than conjecture

I do. Every day, for at least 5 services.

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#134

Post by ramoz »

forsakenharmony wrote: post #121
ramoz wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not bare-cloud? Esp with AI... in 10min or less an agent can deploy almost any stack to an optimal AWS setup for a fraction of the cost of any platform.

AWS is still expensive as fuck, just go for a VPS or dedicated server at that point

Every single mentioned service is either an AWS or GCP abstraction.

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#135

Post by JasonADrury »

itsTyrion wrote: post #118
prodigycorp wrote: post #14

What would this have costed had they used render or railway? Maybe, what, $200 a month? Vercel's pricing is so ridiculously convoluted that you can't even cleanly compare usage. With render/railway/(insert provider of choice) you can at least predict that you're your biggest cost is going to be egress. edit: I just saw that it gets 450m pageviews. I'm guessing on the upper end this costs ~$1k with railway + cloudflar…

if they had used hetzner Cloud servers, probably like 500 a month lol

With cloudflare? Less than 100, easily.

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#137

Post by the_fall »

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #132
SahAssar wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, https://jmail.world/jacebook-logo.png is 670KB by itself and loaded on initial load, so I think they might have blown your suggested traffic budget and still have some optimization to do.

How is that image 670 KB!? Definitely some optimization low-hanging fruit there. Edit: dang, even pngcrush can't get it below 580 KB. Disappointing performance on PNG's part.

Because inexplicably, there's random pixel-level noise baked into the blue area. You can't see it unless you crank up contrast, but it makes the bitmap hard to compress losslessly. If you remove it using threshold blur, it doesn't change the appearance at all, but the size is down to 100 kB. Scale it down to a more reasonable size and you're down to 50 kB.

Modern web development never ceases to amaze me.

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#138

Post by prodigycorp »

ramoz wrote: post #134
forsakenharmony wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS is still expensive as fuck, just go for a VPS or dedicated server at that point

Every single mentioned service is either an AWS or GCP abstraction.

Wake me up when GCP allows you to spending limits

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#139

Post by shakna »

ramoz wrote: post #134
forsakenharmony wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS is still expensive as fuck, just go for a VPS or dedicated server at that point

Every single mentioned service is either an AWS or GCP abstraction.

Pretty sure Hetzner don't share infrastructure with either of those.

Re: Vercel's CEO offers to cover expenses of 'Jmail'

#140

Post by car »

the_fall wrote: post #137
AceJohnny2 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that image 670 KB!? Definitely some optimization low-hanging fruit there. Edit: dang, even pngcrush can't get it below 580 KB. Disappointing performance on PNG's part.

Because inexplicably, there's random pixel-level noise baked into the blue area. You can't see it unless you crank up contrast, but it makes the bitmap hard to compress losslessly. If you remove it using threshold blur, it doesn't change the appearance at all, but the size is down to 100 kB. Scale it down to a more reasonable size and you're down to 50 kB. Modern web development never ceases to amaze me.

Make it an SVG and it's down to 1kb.
Post reply on HN